Terror "Threats" Timed to Thwart Kerry in '04

The recent claims by McCain's Charlie Black about a terrorist attack helping McCain were not spontaneous. The Republicans have done that before, and, remember, Karl Rove is now a free agent who "chats" to the McCain campaign.

Moreover, they are not novel. Beginning with the immediate aftermath of the Democratic Convention in 2004, and continuing through the fall campaign, the Bush Administration formally announced a rise in the terror threat every time polls showed the Kerry/Edwards campaign achieving some positive momentum.

Just like, as Bush Chief of Staff Andrew Card said in September of 2002, you don't "sell a war in August", there apparently was no "need" of multiple terrorist alerts prior to the Democratic Convention in 2004.

The first, coming within days of the Democratic Convention, blunted Kerry's post-convention bounce. Remember, at that time, Katrina had not yet happened, the Iraq War was only 18 months old, and the media were unwilling even to question that Bush was asleep-at-the-wheel on 9/11. Thus, terror alerts not only diverted attention, but had the predictable effect on peoples' psyches to lean toward the known compared to the unknown.

Moreover, the media were talking about Kerry's blunted bounce without reference to the "terror threat," lending credence to the suggestion that Kerry was ineffective as all candidates always receive post-convention bounces. It was virtually impossible for the Kerry camp to "call-out" these terror threats as shams because Bush had the weight of the federal government behind him, and, to have done so, would have been to put Kerry in the position of not heeding warnings -- exactly what Bush had done prior to 9/11.

Subsequent examination of the "evidence" behind the threats showed them to be flimsy and mostly out-of-date. That, together with the pattern of their coming as Kerry/Edwards were showing some momentum in the polls, provides a very strong case for their being totally a concoction brewed for political gain. The absence of such announcements subsequently, with the regularity experienced in the fall of '04, nails the case shut.

And, of course, the Bush campaign had no one who would think of, much less do, this sort of political chicanery, right? No one who would lead the country into war so that they could enact their domestic agenda, and stifle democracy in our own country.

Certainly, the Kerry campaign made many mistakes -- from an ineffective campaign manager to the Shrum "consultancy" group, and from windsurfing to verbal gaffes -- but, consider objectively how close Kerry came: 30,000 votes in Ohio that themselves were likely a result of election-fraud in the form of inadequate voting machine numbers in key districts that resulted in hours-long lines and a Secretary of State who was Chair of the Bush Campaign in Ohio. This, despite $30 million of SwiftBoat ads, and Kerry's delayed response to that diatribe.

Using bogus fear of death, those terror alerts kept Bush in office and tragically cost a few thousand real US deaths and 15,000 maimed irrevocably for life, not to mention another 4 years of inaction on global warming and energy independence, and absence of a health care system that worked for all.

Bin Laden himself helped Bush. Recognizing an end to the Iraq War would send the might of the United States against him, and recognizing he duped Bush into believing Iraq was where the fight was, bin Laden must have wanted Bush to win, as he must McCain. So, he obliged by releasing a tape just before the election. And, it worked: he is still at-large, the Taliban is gaining strength, and the US is being bled in Iraq.

And, Rove is out there again, lurking, just "chatting" with the McCain campaign. His credibility has eroded, and the media is on to it, so Obama can call it out for what it is, when they try it again.

Calling it out in advance, as this article attempts to do, reduces its psychological impact when they do try it. But, constant vigilance, and repeatedly calling it out in advance, is required.

True, the evidence is circumstantial. But, do not let TV-legal dramas mislead anyone into believing that circumstantial evidence is insufficient to convict....

even of murder.

Comments

[DaObamaMama]

I know

[ofbbg]

I'm old enough to remember the non-existent "Missile Gap" JFK used to blame the Repubs for falling behind the Russians in throw weight. Let's not be Hypocritical here - both sides use fear all the time, not just the Repubs.

[PaulAbrams]

I doubt he made it up. The Russians had enough throw weight to get Sputnick up there, way before we did.

[outnow]

It's like the little boy who cried "wolf" one time too many. "Wolf, wolf, wolf!" - the knee jerk reflex isn't working. "Anthrax, Bird Flu!" No response. Mad cow disease! - Let's get the hell out of here. Now that is a threat that scares many but is not to McCain's benefit.

[Startreklivz]

What I find most disheartening is that it's clear the Republicans were/are interested in remaining in power for power's sake, and not to actually do anything. Certainly not for public service to the American people.

[outnow]

Many in the GOP made historic sums of money. Not churchgoers, however, just the church leaders. Other beneficiaries are defense contractors. The top one-tenth of one percent did very, very well. After selling securitized and innovative financial vehicles - virtual shares - they are leaving the economy in a recession. Deregulation allowed them to create asset bubbles and monopolies.Those are reasons to have and use power. The "values voters" provide the "base" but the profits go to the top one tenth of one-percent at the expense of the rest of us. A massive upwards shift in wealth is what occurred. This is not an accident. Their power was wielded to gain these economic advantages. For the top one tenth of one-percent, they care nothing for values - with rare exceptions. In fact, the longer the Roe vs. Wade and gay marriage issues persist, the more that top one-percent can rob the lower 80%

What does right to life have to do with deregulation or wars of choice?

[margotb822]

The whole "terror rainbow" is crap anyways. Has it every been anything but orange or yellow? Nope.

No one believe the GOP because they're LIARS. Threatening us with fake terror alerts won't scare us now because we're all numb to their ways.

But, if something does happen, the responsibility will lie solely with them. They were too busy politicizing every aspect of our government that they forgot (or never knew) how to actually protect America.

[Researchguy66]

Hmmmm...wouldn't it be novel if Americans trusted 0ba'ma MORE than Johnny Mac to deal with terrorism? Then every color-coded security reference would HELP OB-ama. Just a thought.

[Lemeritus]

11:05 PST - FISA being debated on C-SPAN 2.

[MilwaukeeDan]

Mr. Abrams, Gore was robbed in 2000 and Kerry in 2004, we kind of knew that then, but thanks anyway.

[demfriend]

Oddly those of us who supported Kerry knew this in 04. We saw the color charts go up everytime the people really would start to pay attention to who bush is. The fear factor from 01 was still so high people saw a terrorist when they saw anyone of middle east origin and they played us. The people who could see through all of the colors, fears and manipulaton tried to tell the rest of the country but the loudest voices were quieted by strong arm tactics and the control the republicans had over congress. We had a attorney general who told bush what he wanted to hear and allowed bush to take away anything that might have made it obvious what was going on. Thesame way they played us in 04 they are doing now except for the color codes being replaced by code words and inferring that anyone intelligent and who looks different should be feared. No matter what crazy talk and insanity McCain shows he is getting a daily pass by the MSM who owns it and supports republicans. That is what we should really fear. I look at 04 redux from the republicans and for bush to go after Iran to make it happen.

[wotcanisay]

A BIN LADEN TAPE IN OCTOBER WILL HELP MCCAIN.

Where is the guarantee that Bin Laden will NOT oblige the Republicans?

[PaulAbrams]

Guarantee? How can anyone guarantee anything?
I suspect bin Laden is preparing to release a tape in October, "the October Reprise", so that the US will have another idiotic leader who will go after someone else and aid recruitment of more islamic jihadists.
All one can do is be prepared, to take (dare I use the world) pre-emptive action, and to see a plot for what it is soon enough so that it does not gain traction.

[laylahb]

No question that a Bin Laden tape--real or fabricated by the Bushies-- will "miraculously appear" three weeks before the election. Expect lots of alerts and chatter beginning Labour Day weekend, courtesy of our security agencies. Fear mongering works wonders on an election. You can't start too soon.

Black has already begun the process. His words in the Fortune interview were carefully chosen, and the idea came directly from the Rove/Bush/Chaney team. McSame was not unaware of Black's interview, which was timed just as Obama was experiencing a bounce.

No, voters are not any smarter than they were four years ago. They have short memories. Moreover, fear is a very strong emotion.

[alnc]

That whole 2004 fire alarm was commented on by Tom Ridge who stated after leaving his post as Chief Fear Cryer....that he would be told to raise threat levels when he saw no data to suggest it......that fall of 2004. He seemed to come out like ground hog day....with new fears.

So, this is part of the deceitful game the GOP plays.

[DaObamaMama]

It's not guns that kill people it's people who kill people..that said.....take the guns away and people will have to find something else to use and hopefully by that time they will get hit by a bus.

[DaObamaMama]

Kerry would have been the Lincoln of our time. Obama is the Micheal Jordan of our time.

[wingman1]

Excellent post Paul. Those tactics won't work this time. the game has changed.

[Moose49]

Yup. It's shameful, beneath contempt, that this happened in 2004, but now the American people have wisened up to it all. Not this time. Not this year.

[eden4barack08]

I'm afraid that, this time he's gonna go a bit further than just threats. There seems to be a drum rolling for an August surprise with Israel/Iran, which will make US involvement inevitable.

How does one call something like this out in advance?

[PaulAbrams]

As the fall approaches, the mantra needs to be that it would be "unthinkable for the President, short of an emergency, to get us into another war and tie the hands of the next President". And, he will not be credible about an "emergency".
Will this keep him from doing it? Only if the calculations are that it has no domestic benefit politically, and may backfire.
I suspect with enough "calling out" the unthinkability of it, the American people would poll very negatively on his doing it preemptively--they will (rightly) feel that their franchise has been stolen.